IRISH v. DESERT TRAILS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION LLC (2021)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Our review of the record on appeal reveals a jurisdictional defect. Below, respondents filed a motion seeking an order dismissing Irish's complaint as a case-terminating sanction. At a hearing, the district court orally granted the motion as unopposed, but it failed to enter a written order reflecting that ruling. Nevertheless, Irish filed a motion for reconsideration, which the district court construed as a request for relief from the purported dismissal under NRCP 60(b). After the district court entered an order denying that motion, Irish appealed.

It is well established that a party may appeal from an order only when authorized to do so by statute or court rule. Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 100 Nev. 207, 209, 678 P.2d 1152, 1153 (1984). And although an order denying NRCP 60(b) relief is generally appealable as a special order after final judgment, see NRAP 3A(b)(8); Marcuse v. Del Webb Cmtys Inc., 123 Nev. 278, 283 n.3, 163 P.3d 462, 466 n.3 (2007), the order Irish appealed from here was not a special order after final judgment, as no final judgment had been entered.² See Rust v. Clark Cty. Sch. Dist., 103 Nev. 686, 689, 747 P.2d 1380, 1382 (1987) (‘‘The district court's oral pronouncement from the bench, the clerk's minute order, and even an unfiled written order are ineffective for any purpose and cannot be appealed.”). Because no statute or court rule authorizes an appeal from an interlocutory order denying relief from a nonexistent judgment, we lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal, and we

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.³

FOOTNOTES

2.   Indeed, we note that Irish's motion was improper in light of the absence of a written judgment. See Barry v. Lindner, 119 Nev. 661, 669, 81 P.3d 537, 542 (2003) (noting that NRCP 60(b) only allows relief from final judgments), superseded, by rule on other grounds as stated in LaBarbera v. Wynn Las Vegas, LLC, 134 Nev. 393, 395, 422 P.3d 138, 140 (2018).

3.   Because Irish referenced her previous interactions with the Honorable Bonnie Bulla, Judge—as the former discovery commissioner—as being potentially relevant to the disposition of this appeal, Judge Bulla did not participate in the decision of this matter.